Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Vanushka in 3D Printed tokens to replace cardboard   
    I found some really nice ones on Etsy:
  2. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to DTDanix in Darth Vader Crew Break Down   
    Seems pretty clear to me.  "..., you may choose a ship and spend a force. If you do..."  So if you don't choose a ship or don't spend a force, then nothing happens.
  3. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to SirToastsalot in So are they going to eratta the Leia crew cards to conform with the ruling?   
    No some they added in another ruling that said that any abilities that modify the difficulty of a maneuver only affect the ship while it's executing it's maneuver.
  4. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in New RR: what is a requirement?   
    It isn't in this thread but someone broke out Sloane as an example of ignoring a paragraph on a card as argument that Snap Shot can be used in the engagement phase absent the enemy finishing a maneuver text. You can ignore this paragraph why can't you ignore this other paragraph? Any ***** in the armor is going to get stabbed at. 
    This is a concise version of the problem needing solved which I totally agree with. 
    If Teroch doesn't need a target why then should Anakin need a target? If Teroch can wait for Ketsu to give him a target why can't Anakin FTC to get a target? Unless you want to take everything on a case by case basis which I'm starting to think  a lot of people do. To go reducto ad absurdum I see the conflict here being mostly between restrictions on Anakin being considered good (no FTC into his stress removal ability) while restrictions on Teroch/Ketsu (Ketsu can't tractor Teroch a ship to remove tokens from) being considered bad. 
  5. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Mace Windu in New RR: what is a requirement?   
    So you're ok with practically identical abilities being treated differently just because they the rules writers didn’t use the same text templating?
    Both abilities remove tokens.
    Both abilities require both ships to be at Range 1 of each other.
    Both abilities require 1 of the ships to be in the arc of the other ship.
    Both abilities trigger at the same time.
    Targeting restrictions of abilities either are or they are not restrictions to putting an ability in the Queue, they have to be one or the other and can't be both. If not then EVERY card printed in the future that has these sort of targeting restrictions will forever be debated until EVERY card has an official FAQ entry clarifying if the restrictions are or are not required to put the ability into the Queue.
  6. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot as a normal attack   
    Same as our primary weapon alternate wording example. As far as I know nothing except the charges remaining and whether or not you have a target lock and whether or not you've had all the bonus attacks you're allowed limits how many times an equipped torpedo can be used. 
    As I've been saying all along Snap/Foresight are "special" because there is a condition presented before the ATTACK: header. There is no condition before any other secondary weapon. That Epic secondary weapon has a setup clarification but doesn't have any conditions. With every other secondary weapon ATTACK: or ATTACK {condition}: is first thing on the card. Energy Shell Charges ATTACK: is first. ACTION: is second. No conditions other than being able to attack or being able to take an action. 
    Now if Foresight were: 
    Bullseye 2/No Range Bonus 1-2
    ATTACK: Spend 1 Force. You may change one Focus result to a Hit result, your dice can not be modified otherwise. 
    Bonus ATTACK: After an enemy ship executes a maneuver, you may spend 1 Force to perform this attack as a bonus attack. You may change one Focus result to a Hit result, your dice can not be modified otherwise. 
    I'd say shoot away in the engagement phase. 
  7. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot as a normal attack   
    No it ins't the only difference. Our revised Foresight in this instance is not a secondary weapon. Has anyone argued you couldn't use some other secondary weapon or that you wouldn't get a primary in engagement if you Snap Shot or Foresight after a maneuver? Going back to where I started in all of this secondary weapons can have "possibly other requirements." 
    Look if we had 
    Bullseye 2/No Range Bonus 1-2
    After an enemy ship executes a maneuver, you may spend 1 Force to perform this attack as a bonus attack.
    Bonus ATTACK: You may change one Focus result to a Hit result, your dice can not be modified otherwise. 
    What would you say you can do with that? Would that secondary weapon be in addition to your primary or would it be just a normal secondary weapon use?  
  8. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in New RR: what is a requirement?   
    Well here is the wording I will answer that to. 

    So by my previous reasoning, 
    "Before you would gain 1 ion or jam token" = timing 
    "if you are not stressed, you may choose another ship at range 0-1 and gain 1 stress token. If you do," = game state
    "the chosen ship gains that ion or jam token instead." = effect. 
    I am of the opinion that when you gain a stress for something or use a force for something or generally pay a cost for something the something happens before you get any possible positive or negative effects of having paid the cost. The ship with SDV does not get the stress until you get to SDV's spot in the queue where the effect happens or fails and the SDV ship gets the stress. After the consequences of the effect are handled then the consequences of gaining a stress token are handled. 
    I think it is pedantic and petty at best that folks are trying to say ships don't get the things they paid for because of what they paid for it. 
  9. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in New RR: what is a requirement?   
    Being or not being tractored or stressed or calculating or evading is a game state. A ship at range one. A ship in an arc. An enemy ship just did a maneuver. All game states. "The state of the game at any given time."
    A particular game state can be a requirement. Being a requirement doesn't make it cease being a game state. The analogy I'd draw is to squares and rectangles. Game states being rectangles. Requirements being squares. All squares are rectangles. Not all rectangles are squares. 
  10. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot and FTC   
    It isn't just a question of triggers is it? Isn't it a question of meeting requirements as well? 
    The Rules Reference is quite clear that an ability's requirements must be met to go into the queue. What isn't clear is what all of the requirements are for Snap Shot to go into the queue. 
    There is zero question Snap Shot has the same timing-window trigger as FTC. Getting the trigger just lets you ask if you can meet all the requirements. Just pulling the trigger doesn't meet all the requirements for the gun going "BANG!"
    I see many disingenuous arguments in this thread and in many threads related to FTC. 
  11. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot as a normal attack   
    If Snap Shot's header was "Bonus Attack:" I feel certain you'd all be arguing you could make your primary and Snap Shot in the engagement phase as well as being allowed the after an enemy maneuver aspect.
    And as to point defense battery. Huge ships get any number of bonus attacks. Labeling this a bonus attack seems clearly intended as a means of making it clear it isn't your primary and that it happens in engagement phase since there aren't any triggers on it. 
  12. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Ensnare and Bombs   
    "Game Effects" is used twelve times in the rules reference without being specifically defined. It is typically used to describe things like stress from a red maneuver or red action, a range bonus in combat, and in defining "gain X token" as not being an action. In discussing overlaps and ships skipping their perform action step it uses "it can still perform actions granted from other game effects." Those sorts of "game effects" typically result from abilities. 
    I'm of the theory that anything that is mandatory is a "game effect." Once an ability is resolved it also becomes a "game effect." 
  13. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in C1-10P and normal actions   
    Rule Ref page 2
    You have to meet all the conditions for putting an ability or effect into the queue per page 3 Rules Ref:
    If Anakin does not have a stress how can he pay the force token to remove a stress token? He can not resolve the ability to remove stress. He can not pay the cost. Anakin does not meet all the requirements for the ability to be put in the queue.  
    Anakin is the epitome of "pre-resolving" effects. That's what the change above is about. Anakin and the other Delta Jedi are exactly who this change in the queue are aimed at. It is a non-points "nerf" of the Jedi.  
    I'm pretty sure I have argued against several things like Ketsu pilot's Tractor resolution/Teroch and even against FTC-ing into arc before the recent change. I didn't play it that way because it wasn't accepted that way. (Also no one uses Ketsu in my group.) 
    With the new update I absolutely will/do argue that Teroch needs a target with tokens for that to go into the queue. A Ketsu Pilot can not tractor first and then allow Teroch to strip tokens. Of course it begs the question of what to do if Teroch's target gets tractored out of his abilities range. I'd go with "Fizzle" as the valid target is gone. And it begs the question of if when Teroch's ability comes to resolve what to do if what was originally one target choice becomes two target choices. But I think no target with green tokens, no putting Teroch's ability into the queue. (And do not start with any sort of ship balancing or faction balancing considerations. Some ships should not get to read the rules one way and some ships another without properly worded abilities. We don't just get to "know" how it works. That his sub-forum exists at all is testament to that.) 
    And you bring up something I was mentioning in another post. Some of these questions we're arguing aren't supposed to be questions. Like the one on Snap Shot being usable in engagement. Shouldn't be a question really of using this instead of your primary right? Why would you do that? So FFG probably felt they could be a little sloppy since it is your funeral if you're going to this instead of a regular primary. And it wouldn't be if FFG had remembered that some ships that can take it might otherwise miss an attack in the engagement phase. Now its a big deal. Same with Teroch.
    I imagine someone in the rules department, "Teroch. No target. No tokens. What's it matter? This is not affected by our queue change so we don't need to clarify this." I was ignorant of the Ketsu Pilot and Teroch combo because I would not and did not (as I was looking to try and get Shadowcaster on the table) as my thinking is there is no combo here. 
    Frankly, it seems like this queue change despite the questions it raised was quite needed. Folks seem to have been seriously twisting some stuff into other than what the authors intended. Everybody likes 2nd Ed. but they haven't given up on squeezing as much combo-wing into it as they can. 
  14. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot as a normal attack   
    There is disagreement as to whether the first paragraph of text on Snap Shot and Foresight constitute a requirement that must be met before one can perform the attack. I am in the minority saying that it is a requirement. Most others think it can be ignored. 
    I await word from on high of what is so. 

  15. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Frimmel in Snap Shot as a normal attack   
    I'm not saying Foresight and Snapshot aren't a special weapon. I'm saying you have to meet the trigger. If you meet the trigger and perform the attack that is your one bonus attack for the turn.
    You guys are saying since it says "ATTACK:" anything before that doesn't matter and you can take it or leave it as convenient. It wouldn't matter much as if you wanted to do this instead of your primary I'm probably going to look at you like you're stupid and go "sure" except... there is the case of the RZ-2 that I now understand. And there is the future where the part after attack, the arc, the dice, the range might not be so much a better looking choice for the defender than Snap Shot over a primary. 
    This very much matters for that A-wing chassis. You guys want to steal an attack with this for a ship that might be missing it's attack because of an incorrectly positioned turret. So whether or not you can just ignore an entire paragraph of text very much matters. The special weapons rules clearly state that there are possibly other requirements and places no limitations on those.
    Is there another special weapon that has text before the ATTACK: header besides Foresight and Snap Shot?  
  16. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Lyianx in Is canceling a single die modifying my dice?   
    They also dont define what a die is. They assume you know. Or, if its not defined, then use the common accepted definition of it. 

    X-wing uses a dice pool system. They really shouldn't need to define every word or term unless it deviates from the standard. 
  17. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Bort in Sunny Bounder, once per attack?   
    I see your interpretation:    while (a or b)   VS   while a or while b.
    But I still feel the "OR" part doesn't give you 2 opportunities. It just allows you to trigger the ability either after the initial roll OR after a re-roll, but not both.  The ability opportunity window is still the "while you attack" or the "while you defend" part.
    According to how you read it, should you run Sunny alongside Serrisu she could trigger twice on defense as well.   Roll 3 evades, add a forth (sunny), then reroll one with serissu rolling evade again, and adding a 5th evade (sunny again).
    I simply don't see it that way.
    *Edit.   If it said:  "While you defend or perform an attack, after you roll AND after you reroll your dice, if you have the the same result on each of your dice, you may add 1 matching result."  then I would have agreed that it gives 2 separate opportunities.
    But the use of OR to me makes it a choice which to use during your one opportunity "while attacking". Not both.
  18. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Lyianx in From where to measure attack range   
    Alright then, here is a visual reference. Note the last paragraph. 

    Core rule book, Pg 8
  19. Haha
    DarthDarxide reacted to theBitterFig in Tractored ship   
    Worth noting: if you tractor a Starviper and choose to barrel roll it, you use the 1-bank rather than 1-straight for the barrel roll, in the tractoring-player's choice of direction.  I had a friend do that to me the other day, and he put me facing the board edge at just under the speed that a 1-stright would take me. It was great.
  20. Thanks
    DarthDarxide reacted to Lyianx in Tractored ship   
    To quote the rules directly....

    1. You are performing a boost/barrel roll.  Pg. 7 & 6 respectively.
    The only thing a tractored boost/barrel roll overrides is #2. That rule it flat out ignores. But the other two are still in effect. So if you overlap a ship, it goes into a fail state as follows.
    So short answer is, yes. It can still fail. And like with a normal one, you dont get to try again.

    2. Rules Reference pg 19
    This is a separate effect from the game state of being tractored. As a ship with 1 tractor token isn't always in a "tractored" state.
  21. Thanks
    DarthDarxide got a reaction from Rubales in Vader, Vermeil & Duchess   
    Go with Duchess, Countdown’s ability is not that great. Plus the lower cost and higher initiative on Duchess makes her worthwhile.
    As far as 7th sister, I haven’t used her myself 
  22. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Lyianx in Delayed fuses and Dropping mines?   
    Again, yes there is. Pg. 21 Proxy Mine/Conner Net
  23. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Maui. in Delayed fuses and Dropping mines?   
    I think you're conflating the rules surrounding devices with the rules surrounding Rigged Cargo Chute and other obstacles that can be dropped on a ship. On page 21 of the RRG, Proximity mines and Conner nets both read: "After a ship overlaps or moves through this device, it detonates." There does not seem to be any ambiguity about what happens when a mine is dropped directly on a ship: the ship overlaps the mine, and the mine detonates immediately.
  24. Like
    DarthDarxide reacted to Lyianx in Are Locks Persistent?   
    *usually* the basic rule of thumb is.. If it doesnt say to do it, dont do it.  Now is that true 100% of the time? Heck no. This is FFG we are talking about. But when in doubt, thats a good note to follow. 
  25. Haha
    DarthDarxide got a reaction from emeraldbeacon in Are Locks Persistent?   
    “Reasonable” and FFG rules are 2 completely different things unfortunately 
  • Create New...